UKRO and the National Contact Point (NCP) Policy background and overview of Marie Skłodowska- Curie Actions

Transcription

1 UK National Contact Point for Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions UKRO and the National Contact Point (NCP) Policy background and overview of Marie Skłodowska- Curie Actions Individual Fellowships (IF) Objectives of the scheme, eligibility criteria, financial issues Proposal submission Proposal evaluation Case studies from the applicant s perspective Q&A session 1

2 Mission: Facilitate effective UK participation in EU research, innovation and HE programmes Sponsored by the seven UK Research Councils Receives subscriptions from around 145 research organisations Range of services for sponsors and subscribers Research Council policy work Brussels liaison For more information see Core subscriber* services Query service UKRO Portal Subscriber web pages Latest news articles alerts Meeting room in Brussels Annual briefing visits (UK subscribers) Open to non-subscribers Training courses and information events Annual Conference Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions UK National Contact Point European Research Council UK National Contact Point * List of subscribing institutions: 2

3 Web, , telephone, events Tel: Advice on applying for MSC actions: Eligibility Application help Results Contractual issues Advice to those with MC contracts: Social security, tax, visas Reporting Policy background, schemes overview and basic participation rules 3

4 The European Union s funding instrument for research and innovation from Horizon 2020 overarching priority: Exiting the economic crisis through sustainable growth Budget of EUR 70,2 billion From research to innovation from basic research to bringing ideas to the market Focus on societal challenges EU society is facing (e.g. health, clean energy, food security, integrated transport) Concentration of resources on areas of high growth and innovation potential Provides key measures to support industrial leadership, particularly in innovative SMEs Significant investment in excellence EU-28 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK Associated Countries to Horizon 2020 Switzerland*, Israel, Norway, Iceland, Turkey, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Faroe Islands, Republic of Moldova, Ukraine Other Third Countries (funding will depend on income status) List of eligible third countries in Horizon 2020 General Annexes : Note: Brazil, Russia, India, China + Mexico no longer eligible for funding *partially associated to H2020 (inc. MSCA) until

5 Excellent Science European Research Council (ERC) Future and Emerging Technologies (FET) Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) Research Infrastructures Industrial Leadership Leadership in Enabling and Industrial Technologies (LEIT) - ICT, Key Enabling Technologies, Space Access to Risk Finance Innovation in SMEs Societal Challenges Health and Wellbeing Food security Transport Energy Climate action Societies Security Widening Participation; Science with and for Society European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) EURATOM Joint Research Centre (JRC) 30% of total Horizon 2020 budget Overall objective: to strengthen the excellence of European research New research and ideas are drivers of competition Attract and retain high potential individuals Fund the most talented and creative researchers Develop and maintain world-class research infrastructures 5

6 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions... Ensure excellent and innovative research training as well as attractive career and knowledge-exchange opportunities through crossborder and cross-sector mobility of researchers to best prepare them to face current and future societal challenges. MSCA Work Programme Contributing to wider EU policies: Europe Innovation Union Youth on the Move 6

7 For institutions Opportunities to: Run and take part in collaborative cross-border, cross-sector research, researcher training and/or staff exchange programmes on a research topic and field of their choice Employ talented, well-funded researchers in any research field Foster international links For individuals Opportunities for: Well-remunerated 1-3 year research fellowships in the best research facilities in their field in Europe and overseas PhD studies in the context of a pan-european research training network Exposure to work in the non-academic sector IF Early Stage Researcher (ESR) Experienced Researcher (ER) Academic sector At the time of recruitment (ITN) or secondment (RISE) by the host organisation, must be in the first 4 years (full-time research experience) of their research careers and have not been awarded a doctoral degree At the time of the call deadline (IF) or secondment (RISE) by the host organisation, must be in possession of a doctoral degree or have at least 4 years of full-time equivalent research experience Includes universities and higher education institutions (public and private) awarding degrees, non-profit research institutions (public and private), and international European interest organisations Nonacademic sector Includes any socio-economic actor not included in the academic sector 7

8 Call identifier Publication date Deadline Call budget, M MSCA-ITN September January 2015 (Closed) MSCA-RISE January April 2015 (Closed) MSCA-IF March 2015 (Open) 10 September MSCA-COFUND April 2015 (Open) 01 October Objectives of the scheme, eligibility and finances 8

9 Individual grant for experienced researchers to support their mobility, research project and training Opportunity to gain new knowledge in and outside academia, work on research projects in or outside Europe Fully-funded fellowships (salary, travel, research costs) hosted by academic or non-academic organisation No nationality, age or career stage restrictions Specific support for return of researchers to Europe (RI) and career restart for individuals with high potential who have been out of active research (CAR) Outgoing Return 9

10 Standard European Fellowship At the time of the call deadline, researchers shall not have resided or carried out their main activity (work, studies, etc.) in the country of their host organisation for more than 12 months in the 3 years Reintegration Panel (RI) & Career Restart Panel (CAR) At the time of the call deadline, researchers shall not have resided or carried out their main activity in the host country for 3 in the 5 years Must be nationals or previous long-term residents (>5 years in research role) of a MS/AC (RI) For those who want to (or recently have) relocated to MS/AC from outside (RI) For those who have not been active in research for at least 12 months prior to deadline (CAR) Global Fellowship At the time of the call deadline, researchers shall not have resided or carried out their main activity (work, studies, etc.) in the Third Country where their outgoing phase will take place, for more than 12 months in the last 3 years = mobility rule applies to country outside Europe = no mobility rule for the return phase in MS/AC Must be nationals or previous long-term residents (>5 years) of a MS/AC Outgoing Return 10

11 Research - completely bottom up any excellent research project in any research / innovation field Calibre of researcher important Researcher and host institution work together on application Grant beneficiary is the host institution Grants can exceptionally be portable and flexible Expectation of full-time research fellowship but can incl. some supervision, teaching etc. Requests for part-time working may be possible during grant negotiation / life-time of grant Training-through-research at the host institution of Fellow s choice, with named Supervisor Realistic and well-defined objectives in terms of research project and career advancement, incl. a Career Development Plan (if successful) Develop and significantly widen the competences of the researcher, incl. multi-interdisciplinary expertise, inter-sectoral experience and transferable skills Public engagement activities Optional secondment (should significantly add to the impact of the research project) of up to 3-6 months 11

12 Duration of IF project 18 months Max. secondment duration 3 months >18 months 6 months Highly recommended as a tool for knowledge transfer and training opportunity Must take place in MS/AC (but shorter visits to Third Countries eligible) Can be split into shorter periods Expected to take place in a different sector (non-academic/academic) Secondment short visit or field work Researcher unit cost [person/month] EUROs Scheme Living allowance* Mobility allowance Family allowance Research, training and networking costs Institutional unit cost [person/month] EUROs Management and overheads IF Funding based fully on unit costs, multiplied by requested person months Automated calculation of budget when person months filled into application No detailed financial reporting * A correction co-efficient applies to living allowance, see MSCA Work Programme! 12

13 Researcher with family, coming from Netherlands to UK for two years with a European Fellowship: Contribution to researcher: Living Allowance: 4,650 x 24 months = 111,600 x Correction factor = 120.3% 111,600 x = 134, Mobility Allowance: 600 x 24 months = 14, , Family Allowance: 500 x 24 months = 12,000 Contribution to host institution: Contribution to research and training expenses: (managed by the Host institution) 800 x 24 months= 19,200 Contribution to overheads: 650 x 24 months = 15,600 Maximum EC grant: 195, UK researcher with no family spending an outgoing period of two years in the US followed by the mandatory 12 month return phase in the UK on a Global Fellowship: Contribution to researcher: Living Allowance: outgoing phase 4,650 x 24 months = 111,600 x Correction coefficient (US) = 99.4% 111,600 x = 110, return phase 4,650 x 12 months = 55,800 x Correction coefficient (UK) = 120.3% 55,800 x = 67, Total living allowance = 110, , = 178, Mobility Allowance: 600 x 36 months = 21, , Family Allowance: 0 x 36 months = 0 Contribution to host institution: Contribution to research and training expenses: (managed by the Host institution) 800 x 36 months= 28,800 Contribution to overheads: 650 x 36 months = 23,400 Maximum EC grant: 251,

14 Indicative budget 215M (188M:EF; 27M:GF) Publication date 12 March 2015 Call deadline 10 September 2015 (17:00 Brussels time) Evaluation of proposals October-November 2015 Evaluation Outcome February 2015 Signing of Grant Agreement May stage submission Feedback Report (ESR) Intra-European Fellowships (IEF) Aug ,708 proposals received Success rate: 16.6% UK success rate: 23.0% UK host for 237 fellowships (out of 614 funded) Approx. value to the UK 46M International Incoming Fellowships (IIF) Aug ,447 proposals received Success rate: 13.3% UK success rate: 18.6% UK host for 78 fellowships (out of 193 funded) Approx. value to the UK 16M International Outgoing Fellowships (IOF) Aug proposals received Success rate: 16.4% UK success rate: 29.5% UK return host for 36 fellowships (out of 157 funded) Approx. value to the UK 9M 14

15 Intra-European Fellowships (IEF) Aug ,939 proposals received Success rate: 12.4% UK success rate: 16% UK host for 226 fellowships (out of 614 funded) International Incoming Fellowships (IIF) Aug ,959 proposals received Success rate: 9.4%% UK success rate: 12.2% UK host for 78 fellowships (out of 184 funded) International Outgoing Fellowships (IOF) Aug ,225 proposals received Success rate: 12.4% UK success rate: 22.2% UK return host for 36 fellowships (out of 152 funded) All proposals European Fellowships Standard Career Restart Reintegration Global Fellowships TOTAL

16 Panel Retained List Threshold Reserve List Threshold CHE ECO ENG ENV LIF MAT PHY SOC CAR RI Success Rate % Panel Retained List Threshold Reserve List Threshold Success Rate % ECO ENG ENV LIF MAT PHY SOC

17 Proposal submission 17

18 18

19 19

20 Host organisation ( Supervisor or other Contact ) or the Fellow registers the draft proposal PIC code Draft acronym, draft summary, choice of panel Supervisor, other Contact or Fellow give each other access onto the proposal Proposal is completed Administrative forms ( Edit forms ) Part B ( Download template and Upload ) Proposal should be submitted by the Supervisor Submission system checks ( Validate forms and Print preview ) Submit as many times as required until the deadline (abstract, acronym, evaluation panel, etc.) 20

21 10 pages (max 5 pages) + Letters of commitment of partner organisations (GF only) 21

22 Work with your Supervisor / Fellow Keep the Guide for Applicants in front of you Treat the criteria as examination questions Think about your evaluators Clearly address the main objectives Use clear and concise language Explain country specific jargon Provide them with the evidence they need Find colleagues to read it through, with the evaluation criteria in hand Proposal evaluation 22

23 1. Proposal Submission Via Participant Portal Admissibility/eligibility checks 2. Remote Evaluations At least 3 evaluators Individual reports produced ~24 proposals per evaluator in Consensus Meetings Consensus reports produced Agreement on comments/score 4. Ranked list of proposals Lists by panel Projects funded in priority order until budget is exhausted Max. 5 Months to Outcome! Marie Skłodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks Excellence Impact Implementation Scored on a scale of % 30% 20% Weighting Priority in case of ex aequo Overall threshold of 70% applies to total score Though threshold is 70% - competitive proposals need to aim at a score of 90+%! Evaluation summary reports provided as feedback to applicants along with score and funding decision No restrictions on re-application, but applicants discouraged from making references to previous evaluation results 23

24 0 Proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information. 1 Poor. The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses. 2 Fair. Proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses. 3 Good. Proposal addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present. 4 Very Good. Proposal addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present. 5 Excellent. Proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion. Any shortcomings are minor. Application form reflects evaluation criteria Each criterion scored between 0 and 5 Decimal points can be awarded Excellence Evaluation Criteria Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research (including inter/multidisciplinary aspects) Clarity and quality of transfer of knowledge/training for the development of the researcher in light of the research objectives Quality of the supervision and the hosting arrangements Capacity of the researcher to reach and reenforce a position of professional maturity in research 4 - CV of the Experienced Researcher 24

25 Aims of the Research Project: Make it clear why the proposed project is novel, ground breaking or cutting edge in the area; What will be its contribution and how will it advance the area; How will this in turn open up career and collaboration opportunities for the researcher. Make it accessible: Evaluators will be experts, but maybe not down to the level of detail you are; Bring the project to life and ensure it is easy to follow use clear language and include diagrams, images, tables if appropriate. Two-way interaction between researcher and host(s): What new knowledge and skills will the researcher develop; What existing knowledge and skills will the researcher bring to the host(s). Training-through-research: The research project makes up the focus of the Fellowship, but should be framed in the context of training for the researcher; In particular, in terms of multi/interdisciplinary expertise, intersectoral experience and transferable skills; For Global Fellowships, identify how the skills/knowledge gained during the outgoing phase will be transferred back. Secondments! 25

26 Qualifications and experience of the supervisor(s) (both for GF): Include evidence that the supervisor is suitably qualified/experienced to ensure the success of the Fellowship; For example, participation in projects, publications, patents, relevant results, international collaborations and experience supervising (no. postdocs mentored); If other colleagues will provide mentoring, describe it. Hosting arrangements: Measures to ensure the successful integration of the Fellow and transfer of knowledge/skills; Is there an institutional Research Development Strategy describe it; Consider what the Career Development Plan would look like. European Charter for Research Researchers should be able to show that they have an excellent track record given their career status: E.g. Publications, patents, conference papers, chapters, monographs. Highlight all relevant experiences, including teaching, supervision, or work with industry/non-academic partners. The evaluators need to be convinced that the researcher is right for the Fellowship project and that they will also develop and grow as a result of the training it offers. 26

27 You CV can be used for reference to help with space, but bring out and detail major relevant achievements. The proposal is the opportunity to convince evaluators and the Commission and sell the researcher! Demonstrate they have capacity for independent thinking and leadership; Explain how this will have an enormous positive impact on the researcher s career. Strengths The methodological approaches are state of the art and original. Their application is clearly described and very well justified for each objective. The relevant training objectives benefitting the further development of an independent research career have been articulated in detail. The potential of the applicant to acquire new knowledge and skills through the fellowship has been very well identified and justified. 27

28 Weaknesses The research objectives are not described in sufficient detail. The provisions for mentoring at the outgoing host are treated superficially. The match between the researcher s profile and the proposed work is not substantial. Impact Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and provide new career perspectives Effectiveness of proposed measures for communication and dissemination 28

29 Detail the expected impact of the Fellowship on the researchers career: Experience of a new country, culture and way of thinking; Development of new skills which may be transferable; New experiences in new sectors through secondments, etc.; What are the researcher s goals and how will the Fellowship contribute during and after the project. Be precise as to how this will be achieved through the project. What will be the impact of the project and its outcomes on European society: How might it benefit EU citizens; How will it influence the area and science base; Lead to a breakthrough; Develop new techniques; Establish new networks across sectors (non-academic sector). What could be the potential economic impact; Does it fit well with EU strategies and policies e.g. Europe 2020, aims of Horizon 2020; To what extent is it innovative e.g. could it lead to a product or service. 29

30 ID(1 Where possible, knowledge from the Project should: Advance research; Foster innovation; Promote the research profession to the public. Think about different audiences Therefore, need to include details on: Communication and public engagement strategy of the action; Dissemination of the research results; Exploitation of results and intellectual property rights. Highlight when these will take place in the Gantt Chart! European Charter for Research Marie Curie Outreach Guidance Strengths The fellowship is likely to have an excellent impact on the career prospects of the researcher. excellent potential for a long-term collaboration between the outgoing and return host. The proposed project is likely to have a substantial contribution to the European excellence and European competitiveness. 30

31 Slide 59 ID(1 Ian Devine (UKRO), 24/04/2015

32 Weaknesses The project has limited socio-economic value. The impact of the scientific outputs has not been sufficiently demonstrated. There is not sufficient evidence in the proposal of any planned outreach activities for the return phase. Implementation Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Appropriateness of the management structure and procedures, including quality management and risk management Appropriateness of the institutional environment (infrastructure) Competences, experience and complementarity of participating organisations and institutional commitment 31

33 The project Work Plan should be clear and realistic and show how the desired impacts will be achieved; Include a Gantt Chart as given in application example using time elapsed by month to show: Work Packages titles (for EF there should be at least 1 WP); List of major deliverables; List of major milestones; Secondments (if applicable). Work Packages can be included for all activities, i.e. research, management, training. Describe the project organisation and management structure: Financial management structure may even be a transferable skill to be developed by Fellow; What progress monitoring will be in place. What are the potential risks that could jeopardise the project: What level of contingency planning will be in place. 32

34 Describe the main tasks and commitment of the beneficiary and partners (if appropriate); Describe the infrastructure, logistics, facilities that will be available to the researcher and necessary to ensure the successful implementation of the project. Describe the active contribution of the beneficiary to the proposed research and training activities; Why is it an appropriate place to conduct the Fellowship; Do they have experience in the research field/hosting Fellows; Demonstrate commitment by providing the researcher with that needed to successfully complete the Fellowship. Global Fellowships; Similar description for the outgoing TC host; TC Partners need to provide a letter of commitment (Part B, section 7) details of what to include in guide for applicants. NB: Each participant is described in Section 5. This specific information should not be repeated here! 33

35 Strengths The administrative arrangements and support for the hosting of the applicant are sufficiently outlined. The workplan of the project is comprehensively described. A contingency plan is included. The available infrastructure in the host institution is well described and corresponds to the needs set out for the execution of the project. Weaknesses The goals to help assess the progress of the project are insufficiently explained. Practical administrative arrangements, and support for the hosting of the fellow (outgoing and return host) are not described in sufficient detail. No contingency or risk assessment plans are provided. 34

36 Operational capacity of the organisations Use well tables in Section 5 of Part B Profile of key staff, description of key infrastructure or technical equipment, all partner organisations contributing towards the proposed work Slightly different information for Beneficiary and Partner, but 1 page each. Ethics Issues Self-assessment in Part A and strategy in Section 6 of Part B Outside the 10-page limit provide detailed strategy Crucial for all research domains need to identify any potential ethical issues and describe they will be addressed All proposals considered for funding subject to Ethics Review Read the Ethics Self-Assessment Guidelines ethics-self-assess_en.pdf Don t underestimate this section (gender experts in all Evaluation Panels) Relate to EU policies on Gender Equality cross-cutting priority in Horizon 2020 Equal opportunities (among researchers and decisionmakers/supervisors) Gender dimension in the research content (e.g. subjects or end-users) Gender dimension in training activities where appropriate 35

37 For further information see: Horizon 2020 IPR Helpdesk (advice, events, articles, webinars) _manage_ip_in_h2020_at_the_grant_preparation_stage.pdf IF - highest submission rate in H2020 during 2014 submit early! 36

38 UK NCP Helpdesk Phone: Individual Fellowship Call Page msca-if-2015.html Horizon 2020/MSCA website Commission s Marie Curie Actions website (mainly FP7 still) ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions European Charter for Research Marie Curie Guidance for Outreach s_en.pdf Europe

39 Thank you and good luck! 38